The enemy isn’t on your side

Politics 101 for Labour leaders: when a right-wing columnist tells you to piss off your party and your base to ‘win the centre’ she probably doesn’t have your best interests at heart. The truth of it is, Labour didn’t lose the last two elections by losing the centre and it won’t win by trying to win back votes from National. It’s the Labour non-vote that matters, and they have the same politics as Labour’s grassroots.

Here’s the graph of share of eligible votes in the last three elections.

In the last three elections, Labour’s party vote has fallen from 33% of all registered voters to 27% to 20%. That is: last election only 1 in 5 people who were eligible to vote voted for Labour. Over 1 in 4 didn’t vote at all (I’ll return to that).

Those votes didn’t all go to National, not even nearly. Their share of the registered vote went from 31% to 35% to 34%. In the last election, National’s share of the eligible vote went down so Labour didn’t lose votes to them… especially not in 2011.

In fact, if you look at all parties except Labour, their share of the registered vote has been pretty flat: 48%, 53%, 54%.

Meanwhile, the non-vote has gone from 19% to 21% to 26%.

So, basically, it nets out that a majority of Labour’s lost vote share has gone to non-vote. Last year, that’s where all of it went… it might be a bit less than that if you assume that they lost some to the Greens, which was balanced out by National non-vote, but the point’s clear: most of the votes Labour has been lost has been people who didn’t vote at all, not people who went to National. Labour will not win by trying to win votes back from National because that’s not where they went.

The inescapable conclusion is that the Labour non-vote – the people Labour must win back – don’t want Labour to be more like National. They don’t want a weak Blairite third-wayist Labour that talks big on jobs and equality but clearly doesn’t believe in a repudiation of neoliberalism and doesn’t match their criticism of the government’s status quo with a real alternative. They didn’t believe Goff because, fundamentally, Goff didn’t believe Goff. And they don’t believe Shearer because Shearer also gives the impression he doesn’t believe himself. (Key believes Key. He knows he’s lying but he believes in the objectives he’s lying in aid of). The Labour non-vote wants a Labour worth voting for.

And who best represents the Labour non-vote? The Labour grassroots. The disaffected Labour Ulterior who want so so desperately for Labour to be a party to be proud of. The Labour activists who work their arses off in those communities were all those people have stopped voting Labour and stopped voting altogether.

When Fran O’Sullivan tells Shearer to turn his back on the grassroots, on the membership of his party, she is also telling him to turn his back on the only people who can vote Labour back into power with real support. Oh yes, she knows what she is doing.

[And speaking of enemies not being on your side. I love the Herald’s advice to Labour: wait 5 years, then National will get themselves turfed out. It even claims there is nothing the Opposition can do to affect the popularity of a government (a bit like those righties who say the government can’t influence jobs and wages but also say National’s best for the economy). Yeah, I bet their owners would love another 5 years of National, uncontested by the Opposition]

Related

186 comments on “The enemy isn’t on your side”

James, there is some logic to what you say. I calculate that Labour needs to pick up just 0.92% of the voters who stayed at home in 2011 to win in 2014. So getting them to the booths should be Labour’s first priority. But you should be a bit careful about your idea that “we lost because we weren’t left wing enough.” The activist base of the British Conservative Party convinced themselves they lost to Blair in 1997 and 2001 because they weren’t right wing enough, as did NZ National after 2002. That was clearly wrong. It is a big call to decide not to target the centre. You have to remember that party activists are always more to the right or left than the general population.

You have to remember that party activists are always more to the right or left than the general population.

And you, Matthew, need to acknowledge that the general population, when our underlying attitudes and values are polled, are way to the left of the so-called center. It’s only when we are polled on the, necessarily spun, area of policy that we appear more conservative and right leaning as a population.

In other words, propaganda is quite a powerful tool capable of framing issues/policies in ways that make them appear acceptable in spite of the generally countervailing values that people possess.

basically Labour and national keep becoming (or seeming to become) what they perceive the centre wants, and then do (as National has) pretty much what a right of centre party would do.

Let’s not encourage our leaders to lie to us. Hager is right, too many PR people and consultants. people used to quote Shakespeare out of context by using “first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers”… (it was actually said to support the notion that if you dont want freedom you jkill the lawyers)…. but it more properly now should be

first thing, let’s killall the political analysts/consultants/commentators/pollsters/ PR people

There are so many opportunities in the failures above it isn’t funny, say number 1 and number 10.

There hasn’t been a strong Labour alternative to small government, letting the market create jobs and growth, as well as invest in development, and to try to make labour costs as cheap as possible. There has been no strong moral dimension to our public discussion. We have allowed ministers like Joyce and English to look more authoritative than they should be as they have not been challenged.

It is unbelievable that the Nats are considered strong on the economy, but as tories they seem to get a head start there. They need to be attacked there where they are strongest, as Helen’s knowing wtf was going on and hands-on leadership was turned into a negative of being controlling and domineering.

The first thing that I would advocate is for Labour to stop using focus groups. The trouble with focus groups is that they tend to make the party triangulate on policy and be slightly paler versions of the Nats. It is totally conviction less politics.

What people want are conviction politicians, people who will stand up and say what the problems are and what they will do to address these problems. Politics should be about education and persuasion.

And the right have been giving advice to Labour for far too long. I do not know why the MPs listen to it. They only mean to cause harm.

I agree. I am old enough to remember Muldoon (yikes!). I think he really did believe he was making the right choices and policies for New Zealand. He was sorely mistaken, of course, but his many faults did not include being a phony…unlike Key.

From what I’ve heard of Holyoake I find it difficult to place him in the same level of duplicity and hypocrisy as Key. I wouldn’t have voted for him, but I would have regarded him as an unprincipled charlatan and possible sociopath.

+1 Micky
“Focus group research found that focus groups are often useless, and frequently cause more trouble than they are intended to solve, with focus groups often aiming to please rather than offering their own opinions or evaluations, and with data often cherry picked to support a foregone conclusion. A study cites the disastrous introduction of New Coke in the 1980s as a vivid example of focus group analysis gone bad. In addition there is anecdotal evidence of focus groups rebelling, for instance the name for the Ford Focus, was created by a focus group which had grown bored and impatient and the irony of this was not picked up by the marketing team. ”

Cut from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_group

My personal experience, from participating in two consumer focus groups, is that the convenor was looking for the lowest common denominator so that they could quickly produce their report and go home for tea.

Got it in one.! The best ‘focus group’ is getting out there seven days a week talking to people who are living the reality of this dreadful govt. My experience is that you pretty quickly get a feel for what is important to people who may vote for you, and what isn’t. And its actually what politicians are paid to do. Imagine that. Hmmm.

completely agree. I have been hammered for advocating a return to campaigning on ‘the issues that matter’, however, I will stand by this strategy for as long as I have a passion for this game (and I did better than any other candidate in the country against a sitting Nat MP in 2011 by following this strategy). My very strong believe is that what the people of NZ want from their political leaders is an acknowledgement that they understand the issues, can empathize with the situation and can offer meaningful solutions. Clear, concise communication of an alternative vision (or at least a different set of policies that offer solutions) are the keys to electoral victory. Voters are drawn to conviction politicians because they sense integrity and passion; the reason the enrolled non-vote was so high last time is because of a lack of conviction from Key and a lack of an alternative, believable vision from Labour (even though Goff is the hardest working politician in the House and deserves immense respect for the integrity and work ethic he brings to the role).

My very strong believe is that what the people of NZ want from their political leaders is an acknowledgement that they understand the issues, can empathize with the situation and can offer meaningful solutions

This…. and it’s completely at odds with wooing the 2-for-1 centrist vote that pushes a strategy of different ways of doing the same thing so the centrists don’t fear voting for Shearer when they’re tired of Key. [That is a deliberate use of the leaders’ names, not the party names because Labour is not differentiating itself on policy, only on tone (sort of)].

I don’t agree with relying on the dissaffected Labour supporters to still vote left. It’s the very antithesis of conviction politics and chances are will lead to a greater non-vote, I think.

Agree. While needing to understand the policies of the other crowd, we shouldn’t be fooled into believing that we always need to respond negatively. Often the press will do this for us (and they may need a little behind-the-scenes help occasionally) – and when it comes to attacking Nat stupidity, the press have a lot more cut through and credibility. Rather, effort should be directed into coming up with a set of policies that feeds into an alternative Labour vision for the future; a vision backed by policies that represent what Labour has always stood for, and hopefully always will. People from all walks of life will be drawn into supporting good sound politics (after all no one wants poverty, crime, unemployment, inequality and all the evils that go with it).

There seems to be a belief that there is a divide between those who want economic and social equality, equality of opportunity etc and those who don’t. By and large, I disagree with this. What people from all sides are looking for is a way forward that does differ from the failed experiment of the current govt. There is no reason why good policy clearly communicated with conviction and passion won’t appeal to all those who didn’t vote, as well as a great number of those who did. Appealing to the centre doesn’t mean alienating the left, and appealing to the left doesn’t mean alienating the centre. Just do what’s right and both will follow.

Thanks for replying Stuart. I agree with the general thrust of your first paragraph. However, there is a link between two sentences in your second paragraph that are contradictory and probably illustrate some of the disillusionment with Labour’s current stance on social policy.

You say “There seems to be a belief that there is a divide between those who want economic and social equality, equality of opportunity etc and those who don’t”… and … “Appealing to the centre doesn’t mean alienating the left, and appealing to the left doesn’t mean alienating the centre. Just do what’s right and both will follow”

To my mind there has been a strategy of appealing to the centre by dividing the presumably natural voters of the left who are poor into the deserving and undeserving and making remarks that undermine the position of those who are deemed underserving. The obvious groups are people on sickness and unemployment benefits and DPB. This is the crux of the matter for me. Labour must be able to present a new vision of how society should be without undermining the position of those that need the most and have the least chance of improving their lot.

My view is laid out in a comment I wrote a while ago that seemed to hit a nerve, so maybe that will also give you some idea about why some on this site are angered by be use of the most vulnerable people to appeal to the ‘centrist’ votes. Some in Labour – strategists and politicians – in their desire to appeal to the centre vote, seem to have forgotten that for the vast majority of people who rely on state for income do so because of what life has thrown at them, not choices.

Surely there are enough very smart Labour strategists out there who can appeal to the decency of the centrist voters without selling out the lives of those who are only just clinging to their homes, their lives, and their dignity.

Agree with you Rosy in the sense that we should never ever look to sell out those we have always sought to represent. For me there doesn’t need to be an ‘either or’. Bashing anyone in a negative ‘gotta’ style, whether wealthy or poor, doesn’t do us any good. Going after those who are dishonest and seek to rip off NZers who are working hard is a different story, but requires a more subtle strategy that can never be misrepresented or misunderstood. But I do believe that 97% of Kiwis are good hard working honest people who want what’s best for themselves, their families, friends and our wonderful country. The fact that so many are against asset sales just shows that there are thousands who voted Nat but don’t necessarily agree with their policies and / or ideologies but couldn’t vote for Labour due to the lack of a credible alternative vision. Our real challenge, therefore, is to present a vision and set of policies that challenges the status quo in a positive way and provides a credible economic and social alternative. For me, this is the real challenge: difficult but very achievable. Concentrating on the 1% diverts precious time. As mentioned, doing what’s right will be attractive to enough voters to allow Labour to once again rule the treasury benches. I know this sounds rather simplistic, but there is a much more comprehensive strategy behind the principle. Could talk about this for pages, but won’t bore you…

“Our real challenge, therefore, is to present a vision and set of policies that challenges the status quo in a positive way and provides a credible economic and social alternative. For me, this is the real challenge: difficult but very achievable. ”

And if you can’t think of any? Let me guess: “There is no alternative.”

That’s a fail, I’m afraid: you’ve got so many examples from overseas of how to go about things. Labour has always had a better track record on the economy anyway. The problem isn’t finding alternative settings – it’s the fact that you collectively fail to articulate them, with some noteworthy exceptions.

And then there are the ludicrous sideshows, from missing video footage and insincere mumbling to bike races with Mr. Oil.

…I know this sounds rather simplistic, but there is a much more comprehensive strategy behind the principle. Could talk about this for pages, but won’t bore you…

Please do Stuart. You are in a unique position as one who, until recently, was part of Labour’s strategy team.

From where I sit, the strategy you refer to has repeatedly proven to be an utter flop*.

*In saying that I’m assuming its purpose was not to cut down on party membership, demoralise and outrage activists, turn Labour into a laughing-stock amongst a large majority of the electorate, reduce the numbers of those most disadvantaged participating in our democracy, and to vigilantly stamp-out every spark of an idea that anything significantly different from what’s happening now is even possible.

Excellent post. Simple and clear. I hope it finally lays to rest the tosh we hear about he need to win over the (non-existant) center vote. Just a bit of a shame the post wasn’t made a year or so back when it might have nipped the center voters/swing voters focus in the bud. Still…looking forward to any repudiations of your analysis and expecting not a lot on the ‘sounds plausable’ or the ‘that sounds reasonably convincing’ fronts.

I think that the first criteria for political leaders is basic competence, then values, and I suspect most of those non-voters in the last election stayed home because they disagreed with National’s values but didn’t feel inclined to cast a vote for Labour because they were incompetent idiots who would have been terrible at governing.

Labour are a lot better this term, but still not particularly great. And Shearer doesn’t seem as competent as Key. Or Winston Peters. Or Russel Norman.

I agree with most of what you say, Danyl. But I disagree with your apparent acceptance of Russel Norman as the de facto leader of the Greens being Norman – this is colluding with the current shift to the masculinisation of politics. And that is following the lead of National.

If anything, Labour lost out to women voters in the last couple of years, not just to low income voters.

Russel Norman is *a* leader of the Greens. The prominence this year of the economic matters he has always focused on explains why we are seeing more of him than Metiria who is also doing well. Most voters do not make gender their main priority in determining which politicians or parties to back.

have you read Key’s 2008 speech, he clearly identified a GFC underway, yet now he blames it for what he doesn’t do that he promised, in the same speech…

As a currency dealer, anticipating future outcomes was key (pun intended), and apparently this career is what made him so qualified for the position of PM, but now people are saying he couldn’t see it coming in 2008 when he made so many promises? There’s a Tui sign right there.

Yes. But they are the exceptions. It’s still largely a male world. There’s also Christine Lagarde, who was the first woman in France to be in charge of economic affairs in 2007.

Under our current government there seems to be a strong association with power, status, masculinity and a grasp of economics and/or finance. And right wingers tend to lead in this regard. It’s a bit of a shift backwards with respect to gender.

Of course not all men are so good at it, whether or nor they have power, status or a strong masculine image. Phil Goff wasn’t so good with numbers, and didn’t he get hammered for it!

It is why the Greens will do well at this election but then peak as everyone realises that they are just another bunch of mainstream politicians prepared to dump principle for votes.

This may sound harsh. But it is a well known fact that the Greens consciously decided at the last election not to mention Climate Change so as to not seem “to radical”. Norman has continued this policy.

After Sandy devastated New York the Greens should have been all over it. Where were they?

Which act of key is the ‘competent’ you’re talking about, assets sales fiasco, class sizes, dotcom raids, christchurch school closures, etc etc? That ‘thick as pigshit’ is the very epitome of incompetence

And I think that’s the point: a Labour to be proud of doesn’t have to be rabidly leftwing but it does have to have the courage of its convictions, the policies, and the impression it believes in its own ability.

Great post James what you say is true the problem I have is Labours so called leaders have no idea how to get that vote out. This Labour Leadership honestly think that the people who post on the Standard are not real individual people. They dont understand that many of the people that post on the Standard who want real change and a say in the Party on things like the Leaders selection are their LEC activists, and real past and present office holders.

Labours last two election campaigns have been train wrecks and if we have the same people running the next one with Shearer in charge we will never get that vote out. This lot dont even understand how to use social media. Our caucus is full of people who are more concerned about the Wellington game than articulating Labours values. Todays 16 year olds get to vote in 2014 do they seriously think that it is not worth using blogs and face book to influence these people? Hell why would we aye after all it didnt work for Obama! Who the hell do these MPs think go door nocking on election day because it wont be them it will be me my wife, son and other posters on the standard.

This weekends voting on leadership percentages is my last hope that the members will finally get some say in the future of this once great Party. I want National and the Neoliberal agenda out, gone and Shearer on training wheels is just not going to achieve that.

If I was National I would make it compulsory for everyone to be paid their gross salary in cash and upon recieving it they would be forced to peel off the ammount due in tax and hand it back to the employer to pay to the Government.

We would then see how “left” everyday New Zealanders really are. It would also dramatically increase political activism.

Absolutely agree. But under my model they don’t hand it back to the employer. They have to send a cheque or electronically transfer it to the government. My view is that if yoy abolish the PAYE system there would never be a Labour government again.

(I have talked about this with Matt McCarten. He recognises the theory, but counters that a left-wing government should abolish PAYE and introduce a payroll tax. That is, if a worker currently gets $50,000 and pays $10,000 in tax, their pay would become $40,000 and they would get it all. But the employer would have to pay $10,000 as a payroll tax. His reckons there would never be a National government again. On balance, we should probably stick with PAYE and not have the mechanics of our tax system determined by people like Matt or me.)

I have to disagree with you there felix. Hooton made a number of comments that contribute to the thread. In fact I agree with his first comment that says a careful approach on where a political party positions itself is require.

I disagree that people don’t want “conviction politicians” though. A politician who believes in his party and their policy and can back it up with evidence is the most effective politician there is. That’s why they usually predominate as leaders… Although in New Zealand it’s probably about 50/50.

However I totally disagree that employers should be responsible for paying employees in cash. I also disagree that sending cheques is better than the largely automatic system we have now. I mean you guys can’t be serious Matthew Hooton and KK? That kind of argument just makes you look like fools, and I can see why felix got pissed off.

If you abolish the tax system you will send society into free-fall, because private investors don’t have the people’s best interest at heart. In fact most private businesses in New Zealand can only survive because of a socialized tax system. Now I think I’ve given your silly argument enough attention.

If you abolish the tax system, not only do the private investors not have the people’s best interest at heart, they couldn’t do business. Not without the roads and services and the police and the courts and all the other infrastructure that they for sure as hell won’t pay for, but just as surely make full use of.

I was trying to think of a reply that said something about giving wage earners the bailout bill for SCF, the ETS subsidies and MP expenses etc at the same time as asking them to peel off the tax bill… oh and skip handing back to the employer who will probably pocket it or charge the employee for the ‘service’ of handing over the tax… but I think your reply is far better Felix.

That’s exactly the point rosy – under the system I propose there is not the slightest chance SCF would have been bailed out, because every worker would see the direct link from their account to its account.

They might pay if the also see the bill for the cost of the kids education, grandpa’s heart attack, civil defence, policing, granny’s retirement and the cousin’s skills training/education, keeping the local beach free of stuff and ensuring there is enough fish for dinner and kiwis in the forest – stuff that they well understand as important that they can’t pay for out of their own pocket or facilitate themselves. Left-wing parties might pick up a few votes.

rosy/CV, yes and yes. The idea is to make the whole business of taxing and spending more transparent. I think it would improve the overall quality of govt spending. Which I think this would favour the right, but rosy might be right and it could also help the left. It doesn’t really matter which really. It just means that people wouldn’t talk about “the government” paying for things anymore. They would see that they were paying for them. And that would mean no more SCF bail outs, and it would probably have meant interest-free student loans would have been inflation-adjusted student loans.

Could do. I guess the issue is that people (voters) think that the government spent $1.7b bailing out SCF. The govt did no such thing. The bail out actually cost real people an average of more than $400 each. That is much more difficult for a pollie to get away with. But, if there was a good case for it (I actually think there was, about the need for the govt to fulfil its publicly stated commitments etc, even though it pisses me off), then that case should be made in the context of the real $400 measure not the more abstract $1.7b one. I personally have no concept of what $1.7b is (its 1000 Grey Lynn villas I suppose), and very few people do, but everyone has a concept of $400 and it would lead to better public engagement on policy issues if politics were framed that way.

Roger Kerr one of New Zealand’s richest men was bailed out by the taxpayer to the tune of $100 million. Despite; being fabulously rich. Despite; the children of working people who parents paid those taxes gifted to Roger Kerr going without.
Despite; the fact that Kerr only invested $70 million in SCF.

This theory might work if people didn’t already use their money to pay bills for things they can’t escape, like rent, food, power, water, etc. But I guess poor people are just thick, eh? If only those poor people knew about spending money, they’d know that when they hand over a $5 note for a $2 item they get $3 change? Is that it? Born to rule, elitist conceit.

I reckon that for your system to be consistent, schools should send parents a bill for tuition, with a big red stamp saying “Cancelled – paid by public funds”.
When someone presents to A&E, they should get a bill showing the total cost of their care.
Same with a doctor’s visit.
Roads should have big signs every kilometre giving the projected charge if it were a toll road.

Forget about cancer treatment…

But then that is a huge amount of expense just to satisfy a tory desire that’s, well, a bit dickish really. The logic seems to be “people must be stupid because they can’t comprehend money unless it’s in token form placed in their hand”.

If employers didn’t perform the IRD collection role, would all the businesses in NZ that are making their primary living from Government spend, survive 5 minutes?

Fletchers live off the tax payers tit. Most Ad agencies, Law Firms, professional Services firms rely on the PAYE worker deductions to fund their heroic “free market” existence. Given the extent of tax avoidance and evasion by many in the business and professional sectors it is a massive irony that these evaders/avoiders are dependant on the cash flow of the PAYE worker for their creature comforts.

KK! Your hypothetical argument proves only that you can’t shape an argument using realistic cases.

No one said that tax revenues from workers get turned off it would just incentivise those paying them to scrutinise more closely what they are being used for. Hopefully that would mean the axe to alot of the things you are talking about.

Dump Shearer and have a good clean out, the time is coming for a new orthodoxy to be ushered in and those occupying the top 10 – 15 spot in Labour aren’t the ones to do the work.

“The philosopher Jean-Claude Milner recently proposed the notion of the “stabilising class”: not the old ruling class, but all who are committed to the stability and continuity of the existing social, economic and political order – the class of those who, even when they call for a change, do so to ensure that nothing really will change. The key to electoral success in today’s developed states is winning over this class”

I guess you could say that, but you could also argue that National already has a human face – that is the reason for having Key as leader, Mr Smile and Wave.
I think the Greens have slipped into that territory of becoming the soft resistance which will not create change. That’s the problem with the green economy. So called politics of resistance, or politics of change is actually just continuing and legitimising our current ideology. Zizek suggests here that not only do we protest knowing that change will not happen, but we also protest because we don’t wan’t change.

Interesting link fatty. For those who haven’t found Zizek. This guy seems a brilliant thinker, and it might be better to listen to the clip because his tic of rubbing his nose constantly distracts. Also another distraction – the sensual painting on the wall behind their heads. Not easy for puritan NZs to ignore. No doubt Europeans are too urbane to notice.

Taxes,Maxis, the bug in everyone’s pocket.
Is Enterprise only afforded to those who already have bucks to start a business,etc, self enterprise is grandma knitting shawls,knitting jersey’s,people who want to have a small vege plot to sell to the locals, paper boys and girls should have a tax free income as well,i still find taxing those kids, pathetic politics.
Tax is not fair and just in NZ,it does not support those who have the desire to earn a little
extra to support any income they might have.A tax free level is needed in NZ.
This is a stark contrast to private enterprise,banks,businesses,corporations who bleed every
NZ’er whilst sending that profit off-shore,untaxed,oil companies come to nz and get ‘special’
tax incentives and support and that profit is sent off-shore,where the hell is the logic in this ?
NZ is just sitting on the sideline hoping against hope that some of it will ‘trickle down’
into the economy,well it doesn’t,it wont and never will.
Look at all the towns and cities in nz that have had mine,drilling etc they are impoverished,
they dont get a second glance from these pilferers.
Fran wants to trumpet the ‘holyer than thou’ right of politics,it’s that attitude that has bought
NZ to its knees and closer to its own ‘fiscal cliff’

. . . And who best represents the Labour non-vote? The Labour grassroots. The disaffected Labour Ulterior who want so so desperately for Labour to be a party to be proud of. The Labour activists who work their arses off in those communities were all those people have stopped voting Labour and stopped voting altogether . . .

James, your theory holds only if we accept that the non-vote is a left wing vote. Your analysis does not provide any evidence that this is so. It is equally credible to suggest that these voters are not particularly motivated by high-minded left right polemics and dogma, rather by everyday issues. In this regard perhaps Fran has a point, however badly characterised?

So hang on. We’re 45 comments in on this thread and not a single comment that would argue against the central premise of the post? Not one person standing up to argue that it is not the 1 in 4 non-voters Labour ought to be targetting? Not one person arguing in line with what seems to be the Labour Party strategy of targetting those (according to the post, non-existent) floating voters?

Okay. I’ll move the debate on a bit then by asking the following question. Is there any reason to believe that Labour would any more capable than National in targetting sections of those 1 in 4 non-voters?

Is there an argument that would suggest those 1 in 4 are by and large the rather obvious victims of 30 years worth of neo-liberalism and so that status means they are necessarily ‘out of the picture’ from the viewpoint of any political party operating from a neo-liberal framework?

Is there a shrinking pool of voters because there is a big difference between looking back at your family’s generations and being worried that you might not be able to achieve their standard of living and looking back at your family’s generations and realising that a torpedoed and sunk standard of material well being is all that there is?

The first group can be encouraged to keep on believing that things will eventually get better. But neo-liberalism has nothing left to offer the second group. They’ve already received all they were ever going to get. Now they are merely a resevoir for bogey men examples of ‘the undeserving’ and ‘the bad choice makers’ …useful for bolstering a sense of belief among those who still cling to the idea that neo-liberal policies or presciptions will deliver them from increasing hardship and not into it. (Just don’t make bad choices and be deserving and everything will be okay. just wait. you’ll see.)

Of course voters are feeling disenfranchised with both Labour and National because of declining living standards. New Zealand has gone backwards in nearly every social indicator apart from crime rate statistics, which has actually been reducing worldwide. We do OK in education, but the current government is doing their best to stuff that up as well.

National claiming their policy has caused a reduction in crime is disingenuous when you compare NZ to other similarly developed countries, which have seen an even faster decline in their crime rates. So National just conveniently forgets that we’re a part of a global community when they want, but it’s entirely the fault of the GFC whenever statistics show they’re failing. This sort of manipulation pisses me off no end, mainly because they actually seem to believe their own bullshit!

Every other statistical indicator I can think of for New Zealand shows we’re not doing well, and that’s a clear indication that we’ve had the wrong kind of governance for a long time. We used to be at the top in most OECD statistics before the neo-liberal agenda was forced onto us, and know New Zealand is lucky to even be above average.

That all pervasive governmental failure is highly detrimental to people’s moral, and it’s no wonder they’re not voting as conditions worsen.

The lack of engagement with the democratic process this causes isn’t merely limited to a causality of resentment at not being able to achieve the lifestyles our parents and grandparents took for granted. It includes people being limited in their ability to engage through time constraints, stress, sickness and limitations to accessing technology, just to mention a few things that reduced living standards cause.

I think in general the public is disconnected from politicians across the board because of this dynamic. It’s the social cost of the neo-liberal agenda that is turning people off, and the ability of any particular political party to cut through those limiting factors, and the publics ability to differentiate between politicians who they often view as a holism causing their lifestyles to degrade, are the only variability’s. We should not expect people to simply become more aware of cause and effect within the political realm.

The prevailing dynamic is that as people’s lifestyles degrade, they’re less inclined to vote. This is more beneficial to the right wing because they specifically target with their destructive policy people who don’t share their political beliefs. In this way they ensure their oppositions support is less likely to vote. That’s why the million Kiwis who didn’t vote are more likely to support the left, and the left must therefore run a clever campaign to reach these people.

Labour/Greens/Mana need to target these potential voters through active on the ground campaigns while not alienating people who don’t identify with them (easier said than done). They obviously need to ignore the manipulations of people like Fran O’Sullivan and Matthew Hooton who don’t have their best interests at heart.

Despite the left wing needing to reduce the none vote by engaging at the grass roots level, I think we should expect there to be even less eligible voters bothering to vote in 2014, which is a pity, because only through voting can we hope to repair the damage that has been caused to New Zealand by the destructive neo-liberal agenda.

Is it the neo-liberal agenda, or is it because policies are so often drawn up to hide a problem rather than fix it, with no thought put into basic human nature and the effects of incentives.

The most obvious example in NZ being the DPB. To recieve the DPB you need to be a single parent and be out of work. If you want more money, under the current system you have two options, you can try to find work, or, you can have another child and increase the payment you recieve via the DPB (of course your costs will increase, but if you are in a desperate situation and can’t find work this is the only other legal option). The DPB was a brilliant piece of legislation for single parents in NZ, however, this same legislation can be an incentive for desperate people to bring more children into poverty and therefore incentivising a reduction in living standards for the parent and now two children. Obviously this doesn’t happen to everyone on the DPB (and will have a number of people on here seeing red), but a simple bit of forethought could have seen it and stopped this from happening. This same theory is the reason I (and many people on this site) appose league tables in schools, we can see that it opens the system up for rogue teachers to manipulate the system for personal gain, and this is also why the banking system is fucked (sorry, couldn’t think of a more apt term) due to bankers being incentivised to make as much money as possible without thought for whether people can service their debts. The problem in my eyes isn’t that neo-liberalism is broken, but more the fact that too many people in power are short sighted and incentivise the wrong behaviours.

Maybe you don’t know what life was like before DPB existed for women who had little escape from violent and dysfunctional relationships and maybe you don’t understand what a life-line it is for women today for the same reason.

Maybe you miss the fact that women used to stay in those relationships because they had no choice and if they did leave they lived in quite abject poverty.

I know of caves in my own local area where you can still see the white paint on them where people used to live.

Remember that the vast majority of violence in this country is done by men on women.

Maybe you missed the fact that all those children have fathers – many of whom take little responsibility for their children and quite a number bleat about the child support they pay even when they do pay it.

Maybe you don’t understand that this violence has been with NZ for generations.

In the 80’s Radio I did some research into what happens to young people when employment options are taken away from young people. They found males transitioned into gangs and women had children. Had everything to do with becoming an adult when you had few other choices.

Males become dis-enfranchised women have children.

Look around the world – the more well-off the overall population is (rather than just those at the top) the more the birth-rate decreases.

Add to that the research that shows when people and populations are under threat the biological imperative to reproduce increases ( otherwise the population won’t survive) you should be getting the idea that neo-liberalism and the cult of individualism incentivises the wrong behaviours.

Looking after each other, having a more evenly distributed wealth and employment curve, not having our profits go off shore, having four day work weeks, etc are all solutions.

Having faith in your own population however is a pre-requisite – the problem with the right is that they think they are wonderful and the rest of us are shit. You can’t believe in solutions when your mindset is that your fellow citizens are crap.

I’d also add that the most obvious examples of incentivising wrong behaviour is lowering taxes for the well off and handing over well managed state businesses to private enterprise – telecommunications being the biggest example.

Telecom quite deliberately, and by their own admission, ripped us off for years and invested little in infrastructure. Dividends to shareholders and big salaries to themselves were exactly the wrong incentives.

And how you think DPB has anything to do with neo-liberalism is beyond me.

I don’t really agree that wealth means a decrease in the birth rates Descendant Of Smith, although I haven’t looked into the matter elsewhere in the world.

In New Zealand they claim that females (I’m not a Ferengi btw QoT) from low socio economic backgrounds are having more children because they compare birth rates accross the entire population. They forget that woman are usually financially poorer than men and especially so when they’re having children. That means more children are inherently born into areas that are poorer, because those areas are the ones people on low incomes can afford to live in. However it doesn’t mean rich females have statistically speaking less children per person.

There are simply more females having children and living in low decile areas because of how the system operates. Statistically comparing them against rich old people whose biological clocks have slowed is clearly wrong!

In my opinion, more children are born into low socio-economic conditions simply because under the current system females are not treated equally. Young people are also not treated equally, and that’s why there’s a problem. It’s not about woman breeding for a benefit, it’s about inequality, sexism and ageism. Fix those and we would have largely fixed the problem of children growing up in negative conditions due to financial hardship.

In our society, children cost money. Ask anyone you know how much it costs to raise a kid, just for the basics. I know you don’t have any friends apart from other angry bald divorced men, but I’m sure you have some workmates with children who can confirm this.

The DPB doesn’t provide more that is required to raise a child, Bob. There’s no profit margin in it. You don’t gat to cream a bit more off the top for every kid you have. In fact the reverse is true and most people need to find ways to supplement their benefit – legally or not – to make ends meet.

There is actually a perverse incentive in play, but you completely missed it. There is an incentive for those who want to stay on the DPB indefinitely to have another child when the first one grows up. But it’s nothing to do with increasing the payments, as any idiot can figure out that those numbers don’t add up.

“The inescapable conclusion is that the Labour non-vote – the people Labour must win back – don’t want Labour to be more like National.”

Of course you completely ignore the fact that Labour has been dominated by Left Academics peddling Feminist “Theory”, Cultural Studies and Deconstructionism as the guiding failed philosophy – if you can even call it philosophy. Having severely degraded academic standards at Western universities with their Irrationalist mumbo jumbo, they have played a pivotal role in the rise to dominance of neoliberal philosophy.

Do any of you standardistas seriously believe that you can win back turned off voters by prattling on about that Feminist “Rape Culture” fantasy, for example?

Get rid of the neoliberal nonsense for sure, but clear out the man haters while you’re at it.

KP, your premise is that a reaction that uses the same methods as the established system it opposes is singularly to blame for encouraging an attitude that already exists in the original system. Call me a deconstructionist, possum, but your premise is flawed.

Feminism is a reaction to what is now a few thousands of years old patriarchial, hierarchial system. Without something to push against, a force does not stall. Feminism, like communism, like any ism, adheres to specific laws: once the pure ism is reached it necessarily evolves into something else – if it is not purposely stalled by leaders or conditions, as we’ve seen happen historically. Should you be wary of a few people amassing large amounts of power? Absolutely, but feminism isn’t the biggest threat in that respect.

The herding of property and identity into neat compartments for personal and specific patrons to control was entrenched in patriarchy from the beginning. If we are feeling generous, we could attribute physical laws to feminism, in that in order to get an object to move – or change to occur – more energy is required to begin acceleration – or change – than is needed to maintain a given speed – or desired end.

In short, man-haters can only exist in an environment that allows woman-haters.

I’m glad you put rape culture in inverted commas, because it means you can think laterally. What if, for example, there was system of beliefs and social organisation that from a simple cause and effect point of view, was always going to end in one party forceably taking what they wanted from another party? What if, under this system, the taking of objects, ideas or power was so firmly entrenched, it began to emerge natrually in personal psychology and cultural beliefs? What if things got so normalised that artists started creating their works using methods that espoused this “taking whatever you want” method? What if it was so normalised that even people who collated examples of social culture for use in solving social problems elsewhere, didn’t even question what they were collating? Yes, the inverted commas are very important, because “rape culture” is just it’s modern name – it is not a fantasy.

I hope you have enjoyed my irrationalist mumbo jumbo. Under the original definition of cognitive preferences, the traits often attributed to the disciplines you condemn are actually rational, whereas the “macho stuff” modern society supports is irrational. Funny how words lose their original meanings via popular culture. I suspect it’s because irr as prefix means “the opposite of” or “not” and in pop culture “undesirable”. Scientists, when they’re working, often think in terms of what is, not what is desirable and undesirable.

Of course you completely ignore the fact that Labour has been dominated by Left Academics peddling Feminist “Theory”, Cultural Studies and Deconstructionism as the guiding failed philosophy – if you can even call it philosophy. Having severely degraded academic standards at Western universities with their Irrationalist mumbo jumbo, they have played a pivotal role in the rise to dominance of neoliberal philosophy.

Call it irrationalist mumbo jumbo if it makes you feel better, but that’s really a compliment – poststructuralism has been the most effective method of critiquing of capitalim…or put another way, it has highlighted the irrationality of rational economics. That’s what I would call the opposite of mumbo jumbo.
I do agree that poststructuralism has been influential in the development of neoliberalism, but I see this as an unavoidable process of capitalism…once social democracy was critiqued, then the move to free market capitalism was natural – it was inevitable. But, poststructuralism is now at the forefront of deconstructing neoliberalism/third way – next comes the green economy, then I’m not sure where that inevitable failure will lead us.
Deconstructionism offers the best method we have, and it will continue to be that way. The way you attempt to shoot down poststructuralism suggests you have a valid alternative, but you never post anything of the sort. Feel free to do so

I think poststructuralism, cultural studies et al did involve a turn to culture – deconstruction of the cultural assumptions supporting capitalism, identity issues, etc. And for some there was a turning away from class analysis.

But, as fatty says, there was some very good stuff in there. My on-going personal project is to integrate (or maybe synthesise) a materialist class-based analysis with cultural analysis – not a turn backwards, but to find a new a way forwards.

Do any of you standardistas seriously believe that you can win back turned off voters by prattling on about that Feminist “Rape Culture” fantasy, for example?

You are seriously fixated on rape culture, k_p. It’s like it seriously, deeply bothers you that people dare to challenge the thinking and attitudes which creates an environment where rapists go unpunished.

I’m just going to point that out and let everyone else draw their own conclusions.

26% of registered voters didn’t vote. How many people are unregistered? What percentage of our population as a whole didn’t vote.
Labour isn’t going to win the battle when the battle isn’t with the parties.
The battle is really with the system. And I’d go further to say that it really boils down to generational conflict. Once boomers move out of the way we will see significant development across the board towards a more liberal socially democratic order.

Show me a tory who isn’t up with the lark casting their vote on election day . It is a safe bet that most of the 1 in 4 potential voters that don’t vote will ,if compelled to vote , vote for the left . That is why it is time for compulsory voting .

The low voter turnout in 2011 was due to the media constantly broadcasting the message over and over and over that National were going to win in a landslide and there was nothing that anyone could do about it.

The result was a fait accompli.

That’s not going to be the case this time, hopefully, if the polls keep showing that a left coalition could take power.

The big danger this time is that people won’t be convinced that the election is high stakes enough to bother with, so they’ll stay home and let the chips fall where they may.

That’s where an effective Opposition comes in – one that can hammer the message that it is essential to change the Government, and that they are a credible alternative.

If Labour reconnects with its base and provides it with a reason to vote, it can win and hold office for some time. A big “if”, though, for the current Parliamentary wing (the only part of the NZLP with any power), as reconnecting with the base requires them to get out of their middle-class comfort zones, something they show no signs of doing. Instead, Labour’s strategy appears to be one of sleep-walking to victory and waiting for NACT to fuck-up sufficiently for enough middle-class swing voters to switch their party vote. That way, it’s business as usual for the government, with the bureaucracy running the executive branch, and the legislators toadying to the one percenters. We might as well stay with Coke rather than switch to Pepsi.

Here’s the problem. On last election day my friend who is in charge of a large work force was at a polling booth in a provincial S.I town along side a playing field on which there were quite a number of young eligible-to-vote young men playing with a footie and even resting on the booths steps,some of the boys actually worked for him. He approached them and asked if they had voted, when they said “No” he said get in there and bloody vote because if these bastards stay in they are going to knock your wages down to $10 an hour, and the reply was that they couldn’t be bothered! Solve that!

I agree. I always notice that more contact people have with the actual voting process the less they want to see electronic voting used. It scares the crap out of anyone who understands how easy they would be to abuse or break.

The current system is pretty efficient and actually probably a lot cheaper.

Then don’t. You know I’ve always said that the programming needs to be done in-house and Open Source with the ability for the voter to check the way their vote was recorded and be able to change it if it was recorded wrong. IMO, the problem with the voting machines that we see today is that people can’t check to see if their vote is correctly recorded.

IMO, the problem with the voting machines that we see today is that people can’t check to see if their vote is correctly recorded.

Jeeezus frakin Christ Draco.

Is that what you think is the problem? What if the voter checks, sees that it is correctly recorded, and then later on in the afternoon the vote count is flipped at the central tabulation server? Or a thousand other untraceable vulnerabilities???

Basically, the issue is of balancing the audit requirements with the necessity of keeping a secret ballot. Computers can provide neither. They just speed up voter tabulation.

The only way I can think of off the top of my head is a dual system: the voter gets their voting slip which is then assigned the random identifier manually by the current sticker method. They take it to the booth, the voter inserts the slip into the machine, electronically cast their vote, and the machine marks the card and returns the slip to the voter, who then checks the slip and puts it in the ballot box.

Contingencies for bust machines, crap card marking, voters who change their mind before dropping the slip in the box, munched cards, people voting multiple times (it happens – people forget they advance voted and vote on the day) etc can be worked out.

Where votes are tight candidates can then go for a hand recount, and a proportion of random ballot booths can be manually counted as a matter of course prior to final results being posted as an integrity check.

So the procedure is slightly more complicated, but the payoff is near-immediate results and less resources used in counting/recounts. But they still need to happen – computers aren’t a magic bullet.

What if the voter checks, sees that it is correctly recorded, and then later on in the afternoon the vote count is flipped at the central tabulation server?

Then there’d be a record of it and proof that something was wrong.

The full process goes like this:
1.) Log in to voting website using a near unbreakable security system (There’s a couple available)
2.) Vote
3.) Vote is recorded and notification is sent via email to the voter
3a.) Another notification is sent after voting is finished
4.) If the vote is wrong the person can go to the courts and get it changed

Now, to actually scam this set up would require two entire databases. One to hold the correct vote record and one to hold the fixed one and that would be traceable as the machine would have to be redirected from it’s proper address.

The only way I can think of off the top of my head is a dual system: the voter gets their voting slip which is then assigned the random identifier manually by the current sticker method. They take it to the booth, the voter inserts the slip into the machine, electronically cast their vote, and the machine marks the card and returns the slip to the voter, who then checks the slip and puts it in the ballot box.

I’m fully against dedicated machines as they’re the ones that get made with secret proprietary systems. Just use peoples standard PC.

Yes, there’s still going to be attempts at fraud but I really don’t think it’s going to be as bad people make out.

I’m fully against dedicated machines as they’re the ones that get made with secret proprietary systems. Just use peoples standard PC.

Well, that’s just odd. The technology of a dedicated machine is the software. But if “proprietary” scares you, the govt can design the machines and contract out the manufacture (or produce them themselves). And I’m intrigued that Sony etc didn’t select the “near unbreakable” option when designing their customer information systems. It would have saved so many compromises over the years.

The thing about voting systems is that you don’t design them for how things are going at the moment: they need to be robust enough to stand a test of time and one or two demagogue-wannabes. No system is perfect, but to me a web logon with linked voter data and their voting history is about the most shit-evacuating thought I can have about machine voting.

Anyone can design a system that they themselves are incapable of breaking.
The trick is to design one that other people can’t break.

That sort of “I can knock one up fine” attitude creates more systems fuckups than anything else. What it means is that the design team has preconceived use-case models and an extremely simple understanding of the problem which might or might not be sufficient for real-world rollout.

And these are voting machines, not cheap alarm clocks. The penalty for failure is pretty goddamn high.

System compromises are a thing of the past on the interwebz. Never happens these days. Particularly in systems that will run for decades, be incrementally updated for different eventualities and compatibility issues, and are critical to the maintenance of democracy in the country.

Oh, and perfect encryption only defeats one or two types of compromise. We need a system that can beat every form of compromise to do with hardware, software, and the people that work with it and maintain it. Because a single compromise can enable an undetected vote-rig. You might be an excellent programmer, but how are you on psychology or human systems design? Or mechanical engineering? Or site security? Or vetting contractors and staff?

I might well be an idiot, but your overconfidence lays you open to the basic exploit you haven’t thought of.

Na bud, and of course people are the real problem, but it’s easy too verify “Tamper” and better than any manual system.

All u have to do is verify the rows of data are accurate, encrypt the actual code that created them as well …. verified bud.
If it fails you’re down to policing the population, again made easy by software provider encryption.

If you have the 20K keys its fast otherwise ……

Nothing hard about it bud.

You could even print out an encrypted receipt ATM style for off the premises validation/paranoia.

well, that’s kind of the point: we need to be able to trust the coders, the administrators, the company owners/govt supervisors as well as the hardware/software, because they’re part of the system, too.

That means that the system needs a publicly-scrutinisable audit backup. One that can have lawyers and parties observing the process, rather than taking it on faith that nobody’s playing silly buggers.

Youth rates are going to be re-introduced, so they get what they “deserve”, for being complacent!

Maybe this will eventually get some neuro-transmissions in the right areas of the grey matter rekindled? Once they get offered their jobs at that rate, they can ask the silly questions and get the appropriate answers.

She/he who does not listen, will have to bear the consequences. Simple, old fashioned lesson, really.

It is not that simple Tracey, this bloke actually paid their wages ( and he’s a good guy and well respected by his workforce) and they were just metres from the polling booth and they still wouldn’t do it. Is it ( voting ) not cool enough? And the problem of texting to vote is the appalling security problems.

BUT I can remember when I was eligble to vote (had to wait cos Muldoon called a snap before my 18th birthday…) many people who I knew were 18 didnt vote. I am not so sure it’s a recent phenomenon. Stats anyone?

I don’t know how it can be made more relevant to them… I shudder tot hink that paying them to vote is what it will take untilt hey are old enough to do it because they understand the world around them, and their place in it, more?

Are you sure you’re really on about graphs here, McFlock? Having just seen my daughter act in a very saucy musical comedy, double entendres abound everywhere. “Well crafted communication of complex data indeed!”

CV. But these weren’t just “ignorant kids” they were mostly home from Uni for holiday work last election. They should have known better.
The most interesting thing from the graph is that the 2005-2008 Labour vote was the same as National in 2011.

I think that after this weekend at the Labour Party conference the Labour Party will gain a lot of support .
I’m picking that David Shearer will surprise us all. Then the rule that allows grass root members to have a say in the Leadership will make the Labour Party the most democratic party in Aotearoa .
This will certainly attract membership.
There are also a number of policy remits that if passed will certainly give workers and the underprivileged reason to vote for Labour . I’m also hoping that there is some move to help unions improve membership.
On a separate subject ,I just wish those Right-Wing scabs like Hooten and O’Sullivan would have a good look at their own sort instead of taking up valuable space on our paper .

Indeed…even if the most democratic proposals go through at Conference, the Greens will still be the most democratic party in NZ because their caucus members do not get super voting powers (where 1 caucus vote might = 500 ordinary members votes).

When you have Matthew Hooton, David Farrar and Cameron Slater defend Shearer as leader, then Labour AND their leader have REAL cause to wonder and be CONCERNED!

And add to that the stange going-ons in Parliament the last couple of days, where a fair few National MPs had so nice words to say about “nice guy” David Shearer, feeling sorry for him, and trying to discredit Cunliffe and the whole Labour caucus, the situation becomes so crystal clear: Shearer is now a real liability for Labour!

Indeed, Labour and the opposition parties altogether, must look at the quarter of all registered voters, who did NOT bother to vote in the last election. That is where votes can be gained. Do NOT bother trying to outdo the NatACT on supposed “centrist” but rather hidden “right wing” and “red neck” sentiments like “benefit roof-painter” gossip.

The few votes gained in the right of centre with that will be lost towards the other end of the spectrum, hence Labour has moved nowhere in the last few years, rather causing many former Labour voters to vote Greens and even NZ First or Mana.

I wonder though, whether this will sink in and lead to the needed discussions at the Conference ahead.

Well, for what its worth, whether I vote for Labour again will depend on the outcome of this weekend’s conference.

I’m kinda over all the whole National lite, capture the centre BS. Not asking for nationalising the means of production, distrubution and exchange, but wouldnt mind a few deviations from neo-liberal, private good public bad crap.

Anyway, even die hard Tory rednecks benefited from Labour’s historical policies, whether it be growing up in a Housing Corp Mortgage house, having the take the long walk to the school dental clinic, giving birth in a public hospital maternity ward, having power out at your farm in the middle of nowhere so you can milk your cows, having your income protected if you have an accident at work, etc and so on and so forth.

Just read the main article….the arrogance of talking heads like O’Sullivan…. big fish in a very little pond. Holmes is another. They will insist on immaculate mutterings to them dear selves. The only journalist worth his/her salt in NZ at the moment is Campbell.

Great post James. Simple, clear, irrevocably factual. Your facts and logic cannot be countered. In fact reading this whole thread no one has even really tried to challenge your forcefully made point that chasing the so called ‘centre’ is an exercise in futility.

MIL OSI – Source: New Zealand Ombudsmans Office – Guide to changes to the Ombudsmen Act and official information legislation April 1, 2015 Some changes have been made to the Ombudsmen Act (OA) and official information legislation as part of an… ...

MIL OSI – Source: Council Of Trade Unions – Paid Parental leave increases – but more work needed Workers are pleased that, from today, paid parental leave increases from 14 to 16 weeks, but unfortunately New Zealand is still well behind… ...

PacMan on google maps. I'm guessing for today only. Complete genius. Sweet! Just click on the PacMan logo on the bottom left and you're off. The Courtenay Place end of Wellington is easier to play than the Parliament end.… ...

Fewer whistleblowers, more corruption, less stability.That's the assessment of longtime Pacific journalist Jason Brown of the impact of the revelation that the GCSB has been conducting "full take" collection of communications in Samoa, Fiji, Solomon Islands and other Pacific nations… ...

Workers are pleased that, from today, paid parental leave increases from 14 to 16 weeks, but unfortunately New Zealand is still well behind the support that other countries offer to new parents, the Council of Trade Unions said. Photo: &hellip; ...

From the epic On Smarm by Tom Scocca at Gawker: Snark is often conflated with cynicism, which is a troublesome misreading. Snark may speak in cynical terms about a cynical world, but it is not cynicism itself. It is a theory of… ...

Birkenhead Transport announced today that it is planning replace its entire fleet with a single triple-articulated double decker bus. The bus is 57m long and over 4m tall. The Walfisch 57 double decker triple-bendy bus. Owner, managing director and part… ...

Here at TransportBlog, we often write about “missing modes“. Auckland is shamefully underprovided with alternatives to driving, and that’s the situation that led to us developing the Congestion Free Network. The CFN calls for investment in rail, bus and potentially… ...

by Kenan Malik First it was Shamima Begum, Amira Abase and Kadiza Sultana, three schoolgirls from Tower Hamlets who smuggled themselves to Syria during their half term holiday. Then it was ‘Jihadi John’, the IS executioner who was unmasked by&hellip; ...

Global sea level is rising because of warming from the industrial greenhouse gas emissions we humans keep pumping into the atmosphere. The expansion of seawater as it warms, and the addition of meltwater from disintegrating land-based ice, enforce a relentless rise… ...

Source: New Zealand Police – Remuera: Two Arrested After High-Speed Police Pursuit Robbery suspects arrested following high speed drive Tuesday, 31 March 2015 – 7:58pm Auckland City Two men have been arrested in Remuera after driving at high speed and in… ...

Analysis by Keith Rankin – First Published on Scoop.co.nz. Rural Northland poverty in the spotlight. Image courtesy of Localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.co.nz. YESTERDAY ON RADIO NEW ZEALAND’S MORNING REPORT “Te Manu Korihi for 30 March 2015“, Mana’s Hone Harawira discussed the matter… ...

Here’s a story about stand-up comedy that shouldn’t be shocking: Adrienne Truscott’s first full-length show involves an hour of jokes about rape culture, during which time you can see her genitals. Supplied In reality though, how rape is… ...

Emerging local musicians are given two minutes to introduce one of their songs and say whatever they like about themselves and their music. Wurld Series. Name: Wurld Series (Luke, Jared and James). Age: 24, 25, 30. Hometown: Christchurch.&hellip; ...

Tonight on Evening Report we lead with a video cross to Hanoi to gauge how delegates from South East Asia, meeting on nuclear disarmament in Vietnam, have responded to news New Zealand has been spying on its trading partners. This and… ...

This week in On The Dial, the Northland by-election, we go behind the scenes of Parliament’s Hansard office, talk to comedian Adrienne Truscott, and, of course, look back at the Cricket world cup. The National Party is promising to take… ...

MIL OSI – Source: Pacific Media Centre – Analysis published with permission of PMC Headline: The price of protest in West Papua – Research Image: Demotix Tuesday, March 31, 2015 West Papua is a region… ...

Unintended consequences has been a concept on my mind recently - some thoughts on the recent by-election in Northland.The election of Winston Peters in Northland will have unintended negative consequences for the left I think. The left as a whole… ...

MIL OSI – Source: United States Department of State – Press Release/Statement: Headline: East Asia and the Pacific: Criminal Charges Filed against Protesters in Burma The United States is concerned by reports that the Government of Burma has filed criminal charges… ...

MIL OSI – Source: New Zealand Government – Press Release/Statement Headline: New steps against kauri dieback Conservation Minister Maggie Barry today announced the Albany Scenic Reserve in Auckland will be closed until further notice to prevent the spread of kauri… ...

MIL OSI – Source: New Zealand Government – Press Release/Statement Headline: New steps against kauri dieback Conservation Minister Maggie Barry today announced the Albany Scenic Reserve in Auckland will be closed until further notice to prevent the spread of kauri… ...

MIL OSI – Source: New Zealand Government – Press Release/Statement Headline: Law change to ban cosmetic testing on animals The Government will introduce a change to the Animal Welfare Amendment Bill to ban the use of animals for testing finished… ...

MIL OSI – Source: New Zealand Government – Tax modernisation programme launched Revenue Minister Todd McClay today released the first two in a series of public consultations designed to modernise and simplify the tax system. “Taxes are an important… ...

A couple of weeks ago, Nick Smith and the government decided to prolong the sham that is ECan until 2019. When announcing that there would be a “mixed government model”, he went on to say that democracy was “too risky”… ...

The Officers of Parliament Committee reported back today on the annual appropriations for the Ombudsman, and have recommended a significant increase in funding. There's additional funding to help it cope with its duties under OPCAT and the United Nations Convention… ...

I'm sure lots of readers (and my fellow-bloggers) could contribute something really awesome to this competition.***********For the second time, the Labour History Project is running an essay competition to inspire debate on alternative futures.In December 2014, an OECD report ranked… ...

My old man used to label us kids as “fair-weather sailors” when we bitched about working outside during bad weather. That phrase comes to my mind sometimes when I come across people who claim to be “sceptics ” (“Skeptics”)… ...

Teina Pora is innocent.The Government, having considered the matter, apparently agrees he should not be re-tried. It is not clear whether the Government agrees he is innocent, but I suspect they don’t.With no re-trial ordered, Pora’s involvement with the criminal… ...

I have to admit, I had some mixed emotions when I heard Clean Reader had been taken off the market. Delight, because the app was ridiculously stupid. Sadness, because it was hilariously stupid. I still think it's worth talking about… ...

Since Andrew Little began his tightrope walk regarding whether Northland voters should or shouldn’t vote Labour, there has been much philosophising as to whether a “dirty deal” did or did not go down. To my mind, quite clearly, no deal… ...

One of the most significant changes John Key made to the Government Communications Security Bureau Act in 2013 was to weaken the protection for kiwi's communications. Previously, the Act forbade the GCSB from doing anything to intercept the "communications" of… ...

Auckland Transport yesterday started the second stage of the Beach Rd cycleway which when finished should finally help to make the first stage as well as the Grafton Gully cycleway useful. The Beach Road walking and cycling project begins its… ...

As reported in The Intercept, a refreshingly frank take on a facet of modern “security” measures in airports: A second former Behavior Detection Officer manager, who also asked not to be identified, told The Intercept that the program suffers from… ...

In the book, Health Cheque, Geoff and I found that in terms of health, prevention is more effective than cure by a factor of four to one. So the Morgan Foundation retains an interest in the issue of prevention, which led… ...

In the book, Health Cheque, Geoff and I found that in terms of health, prevention is more effective than cure by a factor of four to one. So the Morgan Foundation retains an interest in the issue of prevention, which led… ...

Chris Lewis quickly backed down from the suggestion of a dairy moratorium in the Waikato, but environmentalists won’t let it go so easily. The Waikato Federated Farmers president now insists he merely raised the notion as a “straw man” at… ...

Help Is On Its Way: Winston Peters storms home in Northland, but his historic by-election victory has raised a whole new flurry of political questions.IT WAS WINSTON’S FINEST HOUR. The sheer scale of his Northland by-election victory had the… ...

A revolving cast of contributors from the Music 101 and Wireless teams showcase some of the best new music releases from the past week. Rihanna's 'BBHMM'. Rihanna - 'Bitch Better Have My Money' Is there any other pop… ...

Share this:

Related

Christchurch Labour Members of Parliament have secured a meeting with Air New Zealand boss Christopher Luxon following the airline’s decision to cut its Christchurch to Tokyo summer flights. They are also calling on the Minister of Transport Simon Bridges to… ...

Andrew Little has reinstated Carmel Sepuloni as Labour’s Social Development spokesperson following the sentencing of her mother in the New Plymouth District Court today. “It has been a tough time for Carmel, but we both agreed it was appropriate she… ...

Many Kiwis will be wondering if the joke is on them when a raft of Government changes come into effect tomorrow, Labour Leader Andrew Little says. “First is ACC and National’s unwillingness to end its rort of Kiwi businesses which… ...

Labour is challenging the Government to reveal its plans to make housing more affordable through amending the Resource Management Act, Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford says. “Labour remains willing to consider the proposals on housing affordability on their merits and… ...

John Key has now been forced to admit that he never had the broad political support to gut the Resource Management Act, says Labour’s Environment spokesperson Megan Woods. “Cornerstone legislation such as the RMA should never be changed without genuine… ...

The Government must be more transparent around the draft investor state dispute settlements in the TPPA, says David Parker, Labour’s Export Growth and Trade spokesperson. “Labour is pro trade, and is proud of the FTA we negotiated with China, which… ...

The Green Party believes ensuring student and staff representation on university councils is important. National recently passed a law reducing the size of university governance councils while increasing the proportion of the members nominated by, guess who… Steven Joyce. The… ...

“Nick Smith has got to fess up and tell us what is happening to his much vaunted RMA reform, Labour’s Environment spokesperson Megan Woods says. “With just a day and a half to go before the polls open in Northland,… ...

Massive pay rises at the State Services Commission prove National’s claims of clamping down on spending in the public sector are simply fantasy, Labour’s State Services spokesman Kris Faafoi says. “Salaries in this one department are almost $70,000 more than… ...

The Christchurch City Council is seeking public feedback on its proposed 10 year plan for Council revenue and spending. This is probably one of the most significant 10 year plans ever to be written by a local council because of… ...

Labour wants stab proof vests and pepper spray for all corrections officers to keep them safe from the epidemic of serious prison assaults that are occurring around the country’s jails, says Labour’s Corrections Spokesperson Kelvin Davis. “There have been five… ...

Minister Hekia Parata needs to understand what consultation is, Port Hills MP Ruth Dyson says. “It means you have to listen to what people say in their submissions and then be able to demonstrate you have considered their views when… ...

Let’s celebrate and thank our caregivers. This week is caregivers’ week. It’s a chance to acknowledge the thousands of women, and occasional other person, who are caring for the elderly and disabled in our country. They hold people’s lives in… ...

Labour MP for Mana Kris Faafoi has welcomed the move to place the services from the Mana Post shop to a local small business. “This is the best outcome for the community we could ask for. All the vital services… ...

Labour is moving to restore the rights of Kiwis to take tea and rest breaks, Leader Andrew Little says. “Within months of the Government’s Employment Relations Amendment Bill becoming law we are already seeing some of our largest companies, including… ...

At last the UN has spoken out against the widely-used weedkiller Roundup. The UN’s International Agency for Research on Cancer has identified glyphosate, the principle ingredient in Roundup, as a probable carcinogen. They also include as probable carcinogens the insecticides&hellip; ...

Our photo journey started by the Waioweka (also known as Waioeka) River which flows from Te Urewera to Opotiki, and is surrounded by beautiful forest. The water looked great! Kopeopeo Canal It contrasted greatly with the Kopeopeo Canal near Whakatane,… ...

As Dyslexia week comes to a close, Dyslexia NZ have reminded us that around 10% of our citizens are dyslexic and are entitled to better support. One of their strongest arguments is that failure to provide identification and support for… ...

Today marks Race Relations Day in New Zealand. Race Relations Day coincides with the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. The United Nations General Assembly chose this day as it marks the day in 1960 when 69 peaceful… ...

The knife-edge election in Israel complicates the Middle East situation, even more than usual. The Prime Minister-elect, Binyamin Netanyahu, is moving to form a government. Netanyahu has indicated that, during his term, a Palestinian state would not be established. That… ...

The Green Party has a vision of a liveable, accessible Christchurch with a sense of identity and strong connected communities. Instead, 2013 census figures released by Statistics New Zealand reveal a fractured community, and tell a story of frustrated Christchurch commuters… ...

The Green Party is calling on the New Zealand Super Fund to divest their $140 million investment in coal companies that are vulnerable to becoming financially stranded according to a damning new report from Oxford University. The Smith School of… ...

The adage about the first casualty of war being truth is one that might often be applied to the political battle for hearts and minds, and of course votes. A rather unfortunate example of this has been arriving in the… ...

Over the last few weeks I’ve been wondering how safe our income support system is for people, especially those with cognitive or learning disabilities. I’ve been trying to support a young man who was severely injured in a workplace accident… ...

Over the weekend thousands of Aucklanders flocked to celebrate our city’s diverse Pacific communities and cultures at the annual Pasifika festival and the Greens were there to join them. The Pasifika festival has been held every year for 23… ...

It was heartening to see a large number of people who care about the Marlborough Sounds come together at the Marlborough Marine Futures’ forum in Picton on March 8. Fellow Green MP Steffan Browning, who lives in Marlborough, and I… ...

Share this:

Related

The government has taken a crucial step in improving the country’s animal welfare laws by announcing a ban on cosmetics testing on animals as part of the new Animal Welfare Act. The ban is a huge milestone victory for cruelty… ...

WELLINGTON (xx March 2015) - New Zealand has joined the growing list of progressive nations to ban cruel animal testing of cosmetics, following a two year campaign by #BeCrueltyFree New Zealand. An amendment to the Animal Welfare Act similar to… ...

The Royal Commission has now been in operation for more than two years. We have completed the public hearings for 25 case studies which in most cases have been concerned with the failure of institutions to manage their affairs to… ...

The responses victims and perpetrators of violence receive from professionals, family members and the wider community are key in generating safety and recovery for victims and accountability for perpetrators. Socially just and effective responses to violence; ...

While most of the country has been focused on the cricket world cup, cyclone Pam and tourists’ driving habits, Closing the Gap www.closingthegap.org.nz is reminding kiwis to say “no way” to the TPPA unless we know and accept what is… ...

As Vanuatu’s schools officially reopen UNICEF and its partners are supporting the Government of Vanuatu to provide assistance to 30,000 school-aged children from early childhood to secondary school level who have been affected by Category 5 Tropical ...

The Taxpayers’ Union is calling on the Government to abandon its KiwiSaver HomeStart programme and instead tackle the regulatory taxes strangling the housing market. Boosted entitlements to the first home buyers subsidy programme come into effect ...

The University of Auckland’s plans to celebrate the Magna Carta’s 800th Anniversary in New Zealand are well under way. Associate Professor Jennifer Lees-Marshment has been awarded a £10,000 grant by the UK Government’s Magna Carta Trust to create ...

An ugly incident of racial abuse on a Wellington bus last week has led to an apology from the perpetrator and expressions of forgiveness from some Kiwi Muslim leaders. “It’s encouraging to see this turnaround in such a short time,… ...